Some players did not fully understand what the monologues were really about until the very end (or well after) of the game. Additionally, those monologues were "cheap" ways to tell their story, and no traces of Ancient ships can be seen - even one, single ship at the very end would have characterized them even more. Someone might point the Ancient monologues out as remarkable examples of good speech and poetry, but they lacked several features they might have had without any problems.

A simple look at the contrasting opinions regarding the Ancients is enough to reveal the presence of a considerable gap in FS1's storytelling.

Weak argument. I can summarize what you said. "I don't enjoy monologues. I wish they showed me what yet another race would have looked like. I didnt realize that there was more to the monologues until after I finished the game, went online, and read other people's interpretations."

Some players did not fully understand what the monologues were really about until the very end (or well after) of the game. Additionally, those monologues were "cheap" ways to tell their story, and no traces of Ancient ships can be seen - even one, single ship at the very end would have characterized them even more. Someone might point the Ancient monologues out as remarkable examples of good speech and poetry, but they lacked several features they might have had without any problems.

A simple look at the contrasting opinions regarding the Ancients is enough to reveal the presence of a considerable gap in FS1's storytelling.

:doubtful:^2

Seriously, that has to be one of the most nonsensical things I've ever heard. The fact that the Ancients never revealed themselves is not a problem. You're the one who's making it a problem: Honestly I haven't seen a single person who has complained about never seeing the Ancients in FS1. And before you even think of replying, you had better find some examples to back up your post.

Oh, and the fact that there are "contrasting opinions" regarding the Ancients doesn't indicate a "considerable gap" in storytelling. Does the fact that there are "contrasting opinions" about the motives of the Shivans somehow infer that the Shivans were terribly presented and should've been portrayed in more detail? Or that the Shivans' motives should've been revealed? No. Things are left blank for a reason, you know. The mere fact that there is discussion about the subject doesn't mean anything.

Yeah, I'm for FS2 as well but Mobius's arguments are ridiculously weak.

I liked FS2 better because the story was something different. The FS1 storyline did give the game a sense of impending doom but at the end the rebels figure out about the exhaust port and take down the big bad before it can blow up the moon they're on...oh wait, I got confused...I mean they upload the virus from the Mac and blow up the mothership....oh wait.

The point I'm making is that although FS1 had an excellent story, it was a retelling of something we've seen in different guises many, many times before. Big enemy appears, old enemies have to work together to defeat it, eventually discovering an Achilles heel they can exploit.

FS2 on the other hand was something newer. The GTVA are arrogant about their previous victory over the Shivans and even after the first Sathanas they still don't get how outclassed they are. I found that alone to be a much more interesting story but once you add Bosch into the mix you have something very special.

Is it sooo hard for you to check the FreeSpace Wiki and take a look at FS1's inconsistencies?

About the Ancients: so, at this point, we should blame FS2 for lacking the much needed info FS1 never had? The Ancients are a canon species, and what we know about them is very poor. The Ancient monologues, with their simple setting, seemed nothing but a cheap solution to a storytelling problem. Also, I find so hard to explain the differences between FS2 and FS1's features - how is it possible to add so many things and come out with revolutionary designs after only one year? In any other series I know, important additions have always been progressive. What does that tell you? Well, I don't know... but my opinion on the matter is that :v: did not turn FS1 into the game it should have been. The game's cutscenes, just to mention an example, were not in high quality - not even for the standards of that time. And the story? FS1's ending was so predictable, but people who haven't played Colony Wars and/or other similar games will find it original. (Just to mention how each player's gaming experience affects opinions.) Also, I hard believe players could find Bosch's true plans, the second Knossos, the Sathanas fleet and the final supernova as predictable aspects of the plot. You can't say the same of FS1's plot, which was much more predictable.

And it's quite funny for me to attract all of the flak even if I'm one of the very few FS2 purists who claimed, among other things, that FS1's atmosphere was superior to that of FS2. The point is that considering the good (atmosphere) and forgetting the bad (inconsistencies, predictable ending) is not correct.